Thursday, August 19, 2010

During the morning of 17 April 1984, WPC Fletcher was gunned down outside the Libyan Embassy in St James Square, London. Media claims that the Libyans were responsible for her murder were lies. Yvonne was murdered by a high velocity bullet fired from the top floor of Enserch House, a building located well to the west of the Embassy, in a covert "sting" operation stage- managed by American and Israeli intelligence operatives.

It is no great secret that many embassies stock weapons for use in self defence, which are normally limited to handguns loaded with jacketed or solid lead bullets of standard military type, normally 9-mm parabellum, designed to remain intact and not expand on entry to the body. In the case of the 9 millimetre 115 grain bullet fired by defensive pistols, and sub-machine guns such as the Sterling, energy falls from 341 foot-pounds at the muzzle, to 241 foot-pounds at 100 yards. Quite enough to cause serious injury, but rarely death if hit in the upper right back at fifty yards. Conversely, the energy from high velocity 7.62-mm burst-fire assault rifles such as the Belgian FN or German Heckler and Koch51, firing a 150 grain standard military round is a massive 2,288 foot-pounds at 100 yards. Enough to go straight through a policewoman with energy to spare.

The full Fletcher autopsy report will never be made public, but details released at the coronial inquest into her death are sufficient for military experts to prove that a 9-mm parabellum bullet fired by a Sterling could not have been responsible for the terrible damage inflicted, even at point-blank range. After entering WPC Fletcher's upper right back the single bullet damaged the right lung, completely destroyed both lobes of the liver, shredded the large inferior vena cava vein leading to the left ventricle of the heart, caused damage to the spine and cut the pancreas in half, before completing its 12 inch track through her body and exiting below the left rib cage, continuing on to cause further injuries to Fletcher's left elbow. Massive injuries like these sustained through 12 inches of human tissue, can only be caused by the colossal hydrostatic impact and inertia of a full bore (7.62-mm) high velocity assault round.

To rule out any further argument on this point, tissue tests were conducted in Australia to establish the maximum penetration of 9-mm parabellum rounds in pig carcasses. At its maximum muzzle velocity of 1,350 feet per second, the 115 grain bullet fired at 50 yards penetrated only 6 inches, with no hydrostatic effect at all on wet organs such as the liver. Then, to counter ridiculous claims from London that Yvonne might have been killed by a "silenced" pistol or sub-machine gun, more 115 grain rounds were downloaded to a subsonic (silenced) velocity of 900 feet per second. At 50 yards these puny rounds penetrated only 1.5 inches. Further tests established in absolute scientific terms that the minimum round needed to inflict Fletcher's hydrostatic injuries and penetrate 12 inches of tissue, was a bullet with a minimum weight of 150 grains, fired at a velocity in excess of 2,750 feet per second. Such rounds can only be chambered and burst-fired by full-bore high velocity assault weapons.

There are three high velocity rifle rounds specifically designed to cause the savage fatal injuries suffered by Yvonne Fletcher that day, the worst of which is the `petal' fragible, an assassination bullet designed to enter the body before its nose separates into several razor-sharp high velocity splinters, leaving the heavy base of the bullet to continue on a straight track through the body. If three petal frags were fired, with only one striking Fletcher, the remaining two would explode on impact with the paving, hurling razor-sharp metal shrapnel fragments and hard granite chippings in a low arc towards the anti-Quadhafi demonstrators standing behind the barriers just beyond Yvonne Fletcher's position. Quite enough to injure a large number of bystanders but not kill them, which is exactly what happened at 10.19 am on the morning of 17 April 1984.

The question has to asked whether the objective of the covert operation was simply to splatter a few demonstrators with shards of shrapnel, which would have been enough to swing public opinion against Libya. Perhaps the operation simply went wrong and Yvonne Fletcher was killed by mistake? No. The sound track analysis and film footage prove she was hit by the first shot in the 3-shot burst. The first shot in an automatic burst always hits its target, before the weapon "walks" due to recoil effect. Therefore the assault rifle sights were lined-up on Yvonne Fletcher's back when the shooter squeezed the trigger. The only possible verdict is pre-meditated murder.

Hours after Yvonne's death, when the counter-terrorist squadron of the Special Air Service arrived by helicopter from Hereford, its members were advised by a senior police officer that the shots were fired from the Libyan Bureau at 5 St James Square. Good though the SAS normally is at countering terrorists in multiple environments, this wildly inaccurate police information made it impossible for the Squadron to successfully track down Yvonne Fletcher's ruthless killers.

There are few things more sacred to the British public than the safety of its proudly unarmed police force. Therefore the murder of a young unarmed policewoman on the streets of London would generate feelings of intense loathing in the British public and direct raw hatred towards the Libyans as the supposed killers. It did, but the public remained unaware of the real culprits as the horrifying sight of Yvonne Fletcher dying on national television was beamed across Britain into millions of homes.

Police Special Branch and MI5 had suspicions of course. The shots rang out for no obvious reason, and seasoned officers understood only too well that for the Libyans to kill an unarmed policewoman in broad daylight on a London street was tantamount to committing diplomatic suicide. Making the task even harder for police was their exclusion from the first three days of COBRA intelligence meetings after the murder, chaired by the Deputy Prime Minister, while Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher was out of the country on an official visit to Portugal.

It was an entirely critical time when the police were in hot pursuit of the murderer of an unarmed British policewoman, and had every right to storm the Libyan People's Bureau in order to search for evidence. Indeed the police wanted to storm the building, but permission was refused by the chairman of COBRA. It is perhaps a coincidence that, at this early stage, storming the Libyan Bureau could only have proved that no shots were fired from there at all.

The Chairman of COBRA and members of MI6 at the Foreign Office were demonstrably certain that Yvonne Fletcher was not killed by Libyans located in the Bureau, because after a creative media feeding frenzy and a bloodless siege that lasted until 22 April 1984, Britain broke off diplomatic relations with Libya and ordered the occupants of the Bureau to leave the country within seven days. They departed on 27 April, with no suspects being arrested or charged with her murder. Immediately after their departure the Libyan Bureau was entered and searched from top to bottom by a specialist military clearance team looking for booby traps, weapons and ammunition. Despite an exhaustive search of every nook and cranny in the building, nothing was found, a fact reported by the media the next day.

It was not until 2 May 1984, five days after the extensive military search, that the Metropolitan Police suddenly "found" 4,367 rounds of 9-mm and .22 calibre ammunition, 7 pistols, two Sterling pistol grips and two Sterling magazines in the Libyan Bureau. On the face of it, Mr. Plod had suddenly become much more skilled at finding concealed weapons and ammunition than the premier military explosives clearance team.

Who was fooling who? If the weapons and ammunition were Libyan property they would certainly have been loaded into one of the 18 Libyan diplomatic bags which left the country unopened. Critically though, no Sterling sub-machine guns or 7.62-mm high velocity assault rounds were planted in the Libyan building to be later "found" by the Metropolitan Police. There were sound reasons for this. Any "whole" Sterling sub-machine gun could be tested ballistically by forensic scientists, an event that had to be avoided at all costs because it would have exposed the deception; and 7.62-mm assault rounds had to be excluded because WPC Fletcher was notionally murdered with a low velocity 9-mm parabellum round: a fraudulent "fact" officially recorded at the inquest into her death.

The situation became more confusing in April 1985, when on the first anniversary of Yvonne Fletcher's pre-meditated murder, BBC2 Television ran a documentary in which an amateur video film of the demonstration was shown for the first time. The amateur camera allegedly recorded the sound of a 12-shot Sterling sub-machine gun burst, which concurred nicely with the coronial inquest findings of May 1984, and appeared to explain the inexplicable: eleven fired 9-mm bullets found by the Police during a search of St James conducted 10 days after the murder, in which time period the crime scene was not secured. Add to that the 9-mm bullet which allegedly killed Yvonne Fletcher but was not recovered from her body, and we have a neat figure of 12 rounds to match the forged video footage.

The amateur video footage provides an object lesson in how not to use forged evidence in an attempt to pervert the course of justice. The audio of a Sterling firing an 12-shot burst is real enough, but it was not recorded in St James Square, nor on the morning of the 17th April 1984 when Yvonne Fletcher was murdered. How is it possible to prove this? By relying on hard science and ignoring misleading media hype. Immediately before the murder, one of the professional cameramen filmed the front facade of the Libyan building, which was crossed diagonally by a clear shadow line cast by the sun. The exact time was accurately calculated using survey techniques and astronomical data from the Greenwich Observatory in London.

The forged amateur footage also shows a sun line diagonally crossing the front of the Libyan building, but unfortunately it is in the wrong place and at the wrong angle for 10.19 am on the morning of 17 April 1984. More convincing for the layman reader is the car parked in front of the Bureau. On the professional video the car is an unoccupied blue Peugeot sedan with its bonnet positioned between the two windows to the left of the Bureau entrance. On the blatantly forged amateur video, the unoccupied blue Peugeot sedan magically transforms itself into a white station wagon, starts its own engine, then drives itself five feet closer to the Libyan Bureau front door. Clever!

For forensic scientists there are a staggering number of other errors on the footage providing 100% proof of forgery, including the sun shadow line failing to shade the bonnet of the "new" white station wagon; the green Libyan flag vanishing from the pole above the Bureau front door, and a tall black street light to the right of the Bureau disappearing completely. There is no doubt the forged footage was prepared in order to forever cement the reversed Orwellian media "truth" in the minds of the British Parliament and people. Anyone daring to challenge this reverse media "truth" would be patted indulgently on the head and given a copy of the BBC2 film, complete with the damning forged amateur video footage "proving" the Libyans fired an entirely mythical Sterling sub-machine gun burst that day.

Ultimately the ploy failed. Unwittingly perhaps, the film makers proved their own video footage was deliberately forged, and thus in turn proved they were accessories after the fact to the murder of an unarmed British policewoman on the streets of London. At the time of going to press, Scotland Yard was making no moves to have this loathsome section of the media tracked down and charged. Sooner or later it must do so, because there is no statute of limitation where the murder of a uniformed police officer is concerned.

Yvonne Fletcher's pre-meditated murder was one of the major triggers allowing blanket sanctions to be imposed on Libya by the United Nations Security Council. With less than a handful of bullets Libya was brought to its knees by deception alone. But who did it? It was in early 1984 that an American multinational moved into 8 St James Square. Unknown to the British or Libyans, the multinational owned three smaller oil-related service companies. The first, Intairdrill, operated inside Libya, while the second had exclusive access to the top two floors at 8 St James Square. The author was a consultant to the third. One year after Yvonne Fletcher's murder, all three small companies were discreetly disposed of by the multinational corporation, which was in turn linked to foreign intelligence agencies including the Israeli Mossad and American CIA.

The identity of the person responsible for actually ordering the operation may never be uncovered. Was it the Director of the Mossad, or the Director of the CIA? Or was it simply an in-house multinational job on behalf of one of those agencies or an unknown third party? Because the occupants of 8 St James on that day and their connections are known, it is still possible to backtrack the chain of command, though this would require significant resources.

For the television media 1984 was a landmark year. Though in the past "little" lies had been broadcast frequently, this was the first proven occasion when the media deliberately covered up a horrific murder and reversed the absolute scientific proof for its own biased internationalist reasons, to the detriment of British national security. Fiction was overwhelmingly embraced as a substitute for truth. After 17 April 1984 the media lost its credibility. Lying on national television about the horrific pre-meditated murder of an unarmed British policewoman on the streets of London, proved it would lie about anything at all, once paid the traditional thirty pieces of silver.

WPC Yvonne Joyce Fletcher, ruthlessly sacrificed on television at the age of twenty five, was laid to rest at her local village church in the county of Wiltshire with full police honours. One of her mourners was the very same man who denied her superiors the right to enter the Bureau at 5 St James Square, and prove no shots were fired by the Libyans that day: The Chairman of COBRA.

Confidential tissue tests, in Australia during October 1995, detailed in this report, which provided absolute scientific proof that Yvonne Fletcher's hydrostatic injuries could not have been caused under any circumstances by a 9-mm parabellum bullet, even at maximum muzzle velocity. These tissue tests can be replicated with ease on pig carcasses.

AudioPro sound analysis, conducted in Australia during September 1995, providing absolute scientific proof that Yvonne Fletcher was hit by the first round in the 3-shot high velocity burst, and that the burst itself was fired from the west of her known position. The same computer program was used to prove the "amateur" video footage audio a forgery. Copy of audio profile of 3-shot burst attached to this report.

"Siege - A Failure of Intelligence?" Documentary run by BBC2 in April 1985, which includes the amateur video footage allegedly filmed in St James Squareon the morning of the 17th April 1984. This amateur footage and sound track is pure propaganda designed to reinforce the false media reportage of WPC Yvonne Fletcher's murder in April 1984, and is scientifically proven a forgery as detailed in this report. The producer of this forged footage is guilty of grave offences under the Anti Terrorism Act.

Added January 1998: "Murder in St James's" Extended documentary run by Channel 4's flagship `Dispatches' current affairs programme on Wednesday 10 April 1996. Producer/Director Richard Belfield of film makers Fulcrum Productions. Though planned by Channel 4 as an honest portrayal of my accurate investigation, the project deteriorated into a propaganda masterpiece by the time it went to air, despite Fulcrum being fully aware of most of the scientific facts in this report. See letters to the author from Channel 4 Television and Fulcrum Productions.

LIBYANS DID NOT CONFESS TO YVONNE FLETCHER'S MURDER

Copyright Joe Vialls

On 7 July 1999, Foreign Secretary Robin Cook announced in the British House of Commons, that the Libyan Government "had accepted general responsibility for Yvonne Fletcher's death, expressed its deep regrets to her mother, and paid compensation."

On 8 July 1999, the Libyan Ambassador-Designate to London denied Cook's claim, telling Sir Teddy Taylor MP that his government had made no such statement, and firmly denying Libyan involvement in Yvonne Fletcher's murder on 17 April 1984.

The alleged "compensation" was a misguided cheque provided by the Libyans at the express request of the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office during late 1991, as "a gesture of good faith". The "deep regrets" were personal condolences expressed to Yvonne's mum by ordinary Libyan people when she visited a meeting in Tripoli during 1994, and "responsibility" was "Libya accepts general responsibility for the behaviour of its diplomats inside its London Embassy at the time of the shooting." Under the Berne Convention, every nation on earth is responsible for the general behaviour of its diplomats inside each and every one of its embassies at all times.

A new investigation into Fletcher's murder was launched in 1998 and centres on fresh scientific evidence presented by the author, proving that Fletcher was murdered by a bullet fired from a nearby American multinational building, not from the Libyan Embassy. The investigation continues today under the control of Home Office and Metropolitan Police officials, despite frantic left-wing political attempts to stop it.

There is no doubt that Robin Cook's statement was designed to quash growing public skepticism about Libyan involvement in the downing of Pan Am 103 during 1988. When investigators finally prove officially that the Libyans were not responsible for Yvonne Fletcher's murder in London, British and American Government credibility over the fake charges on Pan Am 103 will be destroyed. This will leave unanswered the critical question of exactly who ordered and carried out the murders of 259 citizens on the ill-fated "Maid of the Seas", high above Lockerbie in December 1988.

J7 Campaign & Research on Mathaba Independent News

London 7/7 Bomb Questions Remain Unanswered 9 Months Later

The British Government has twice refused the British People a Public Inquiry into the devastating events of July 7th. Why? Who benefits from allowing the official confusion of stories to stand as an explanation for how 56 people died and 700 were injured?

The alternative news site BreakForNews has conducted an interview with London mother Bridget Dunne concerning questions she has raised about the London July 7, 2005 bombings.
Ms Dunne has started a blog with the aim of establishing what actually happened that day, since her queries to officialdom have raised more questions than answers.
As pointed out before on Mathaba, in Times of Terror Truth Takes a Tumble, many questions remain unanswered. Ms Dunne went through the Freedom of Information Act to try to obtain information and has been turned down by Inspector Neil Smith of New Scotland Yard's Anti-Terrorist branch, according to an interview on BreakForNews.
Smith referred Ms Dunne to the BBC British Broadcasting Corporation news site, saying that the information she requested is in the public demain, even though it is not as is revealed in the online interview.
Eventually she obtained a reply from the British Transport Police about the actual times of trains on that day, which were not as Inspector Smith had claimed, available in any newspaper or publication accessible to the public.
The time that the alleged bombers got on the train at Luton is not in the public domain nor the time they got off at Kings Cross. No evidence has ever been seen that they were actually on any train platforms or caught the train that day, although Britain has the highest ratio of CCTV Cameras to population than any other country in the world.
The media had reported that the alleged bombers had boarded the 7.40 train from Luton, however Ms Dunne has established that the train did not run at all on that day. It would thus have been impossible to have reached Kings Cross in time for the bombings unless they had caught a train at 7.25. It would have been difficult for them to have caught that train according to the official version of timing, although not impossible.
Police press conferences in the wake of the bombings however claimed that the alleged bombers took the 7.40 train. There was a train at 7.42, however taking that train would have meant the bombers arriving too late in London to have carried out the bombings, in addition there were severe delays that day.
None of the police posters put up in the stations since asked for people to ask if people were on specific trains, only standard posters were put up. If the police had been seriously looking for witnesses, they would have mentioned train times, according to Ms Dunne.
A video shows the alleged bombers entering Luton train station at around 7.22 am, however this image has come under much controversy due its low quality as analysed on other alternative news sites such as PrisonPlanet, in contrast to the released images of the so-called rehearsal on the 28th of June, 2005.
Such are the amount of questions surrounding the events of July 7 bombings in London last year, that in the face of a refusal by the British government to allow an inquiry into the events, citizens have gathered together to start a July 7th Truth Campaign calling for an Independent People's Inquiry.
The interview brings up a number of interesting facts about a Mr Peter Power who was also involved in a number of other serious incidents on the London Underground, and was also a commander at the time of the Libyan Embassy seige which resulted in the assassination of a London police woman which was falsely blamed on Libya. This led to breaking relations between Libya and Britain to the detriment of the two peoples.
The policewoman named Yvonne Fletcher was fatally shot in St.James Square in London by a bullet which was claimed to have been fired from the Libyan Embassy. This created a massive backlash of hatred towards the Libyans by Westerners, yet it has been proven now by forensic examinations that the bullets which killed WPC Fletcher could not have been fired from the Libyan Embassy, but from another building in St.James Square.
During the interview Bridget Dunne and her host Fintan Dunne (no direct relation) point out many discrepencies in the official versions of the story.
Readers can listen to the interview in full at:

July 7th as Machiavellian State Terror?

Introduction

Early reports likened the 2005 July 7th London bombings to Nazi air attacks on Britain more than sixty years earlier. A Sun leader on July 8 declared: “Our spirit will never be broken: Adolf Hitler's Blitz and his doodlebug rockets never once broke London's spirit."2 The comparison stuck, though the July explosions appear dwarfish beside savage Luftwaffe devastation of London, Coventry and other civilian targets. Indeed ever since September 11 media commentators have portrayed Islamic fanaticism as an eruption of evil unprecedented since Hitler’s bloody European rampage.

In this essay I want to draw a different parallel, though one that returns to World War II aerial warfare and its relation to so-called Islamofascism. July 7th resembles in many respects two other instances of terror on a world-historical scale: the Dallas shooting of President John F. Kennedy in 1963 and bin Laden’s nightmarish September flights into the Twin Towers and the Pentagon. Like these earlier incidents, the London bombings may be an instance of what I have called Machiavellian state terror, spectacular violence perpetrated against the state by elements of the state itself.3 This form of terror advances domestic and/or foreign policy goals of the established order, and may involve assaults (real or fabricated) on the state’s own military, on innocent civilians, or on political leaders. Government sources and compliant media rush to blame a convenient foe, whether another nation, a political or ethnic group, or a “lone nut.”

Success of such episodes of terror, especially in advanced capitalist democracies, relies on inability or unwillingness of effective oppositional power centres to challenge the official account. Both the 1964 Warren Report on the Kennedy assassination and the 9-11 Commission Report issued 40 years later, offer profoundly flawed narratives. Nevertheless, those responsible for protecting the public interest, such as the media, or mainstream academic researchers, have embraced these cover-ups as unvarnished truth. With regard to the 9-11 Report, for example, Guardian columnist George Monbiot contends that dissenters “permanently wreck their credibility” and present a “crazy distraction” that endangers “popular resistance movements.”4 Yet Monbiot admits the air assaults could have been averted by the Bush administration. “I believe that they were criminally negligent in failing to respond to intelligence about a potential attack by al-Qaida, and that they have sought to disguise their incompetence by classifying crucial documents.”5 Incidentally, Monbiot’s remarks are clearly not supported by the 9-11 Commission, which found no malfeasance on the part of the Bush White House.

It may be easier to recognize Machiavellian state terror when practiced by nations other than our own. For example, The New York Times—a long-time opponent of “conspiracy theory”—offered a sober appraisal of the Putin government’s possible involvement in terrorist bombing of apartment buildings used to justify Russia’s renewed hostilities against Chechnya. “From the start, the bombings were viewed with suspicion, especially after the discovery of federal agents planting what turned out to be explosives in the basement of another building. (A training exercise, officials finally said.) In Russian politics, the violence clearly played to the advantage of hard-liners like Mr. Putin.”6 The respected U.S. intelligence site, Stratfor.com, surmised that recent highly-publicized attacks carried out by ethnic Uighur separatists on the Chinese border may have been manufactured by Beijing in order to curry favour with the United States as an effective opponent of Islamic expansionism, and torpedo the nomination of an Uighur activist for the Nobel Peace Prize. Besides, noted Stratfor, “by raising the Uighur "terrorist" issue, Beijing can create a sense of trouble and a rallying point for national unity without needing to threaten its foreign relations.”7

Events long in the past also may be less difficult to recognize as instances of Machiavellian state terror. Anti-Japanese hysteria generated by government and the press in the United States and Canada during World War II justified internment of tens of thousands of American and Canadian citizens and offered a rallying point for the war effort. Evidence of potential Japanese terror attacks on North American soil was totally imaginary, as now acknowledged. Far from offering opposition to a cruel and racist policy, writers and intellectuals of every political stripe supported “sending Japanese Americans [and Japanese Canadians] to concentration camps.” As historian Gary Okihiro observes, little was learned from the inhuman treatment of ethnic Japanese. Thirteen years after the belated Civil Liberties Act of 1988, accepting U.S. responsibility for wartime ethnic cleansing, “Congress passed the U.S.A. Patriot Act of 2001, under which racial and religious profiling enables a secret and arbitrary government sponsored program of registration, expulsion, and indefinite detention.”8

The JFK Assassination, 9-11, and July 7th

In the first few hours following the Kennedy murder, suspicion fell on all three possible culprits usually impugned during episodes of Machiavellian state terror: a foreign state, a marginalized group (in this case, domestic Communists), and then a lone nut.9 The spotlight shone briefly on Cuba and the Soviet Union (as sponsors of “Communist assassin” Oswald), and then fatally illuminated only Lee Harvey Oswald himself, an individual with ties to both the former USSR and the Fair Play for Cuba Committee (a CIA-front whose ostensible goal was to encourage more congenial relations between the United States and Cuba). Oswald’s supposed Communist connections were downplayed by the Warren Report, which famously denied any conspiracy.

Few, if any, mainstream historians query the Oswald story, but a growing number recognize that Kennedy’s assassination removed a serious obstacle to escalation in Vietnam, a policy vigorously pursued by his successor Lyndon Baines Johnson, after the 1964 U.S. election.10 As documented on this site,11 the July 7th bombings helped weaken civil liberties in the U.K, providing motivation for Tony Blair’s ever more draconian anti-terror legislation. The terror events also severely discombobulated the global justice movement that had successfully raised issues of poverty, war and atmospheric change at the Gleneagles G-8 Summit, opened the day before the blasts.

Peter Dale Scott notes the striking similarities between the JFK murder and 9-11, including “the ability of the government to establish a guilty party or parties immediately, and the press and media consumption of that product to the exclusion of all other possibilities.”12 I would add that these resemblances extend to the London bombings. In Dallas on 22 November, the FBI targeted Oswald within minutes of the assassination, even though Oswald did not physically match his own description in the FBI file. Police surrounded the Texas Theatre, where Oswald had secluded himself, only seconds after he entered the movie house. In another feat of astounding investigatory prowess, the FBI had identified the 9-11 hijackers before Tower Two collapsed at 9:59 am. The FBI list included Flight 93 hijackers, even though NORAD “wasn’t aware that Flight 93 had been hijacked until 10:08, which is nine minutes later.”13

Shortly after the 7/7 bombings, Tony Blair announced from the Gleneagles G-8 Summit that terrorists had attacked the capital.14 The official story jelled rapidly although police did not mention four perpetrators until five days after the blasts.

The investigation led us to have concerns about the movements and activities of four men, three of whom came from the West Yorkshire area. We are trying to establish their movements in the run up to last week's attacks, and specifically to establish if they all died in the explosions.15

By July 18th the police had identified all the bombers to the press.16 Somehow police found identification for bomber Mohammad Sidique Khan at three of the four bomb sites.17

Scott’s remarks about the investigative parallels that join and extend from JFK and 9-11, may also be true of July 7th.

So it’s worth thinking about that for a moment, the two events together. And then in the other cases that we know about, how the identity of the person who is ultimately going to be identified as the culprit is established at the very beginning - Sirhan Sirhan [alleged killer of Robert F. Kennedy] the bag with the gun that identifies James Earl Ray [supposed assassin of Martin Luther King] – it isn’t investigative work AFTER the assassination, that finds these people, it is just following up what is already there, from the very beginning.18

There are similarities between 9-11 and 7-7 that do not apply to the killing of President Kennedy. There was no training exercise on the morning of 22 November in Dallas that mimicked the Dealey Plaza shooting, for example, though a number of such exercises were in play on September 11, and at least one existed in London on July 7th.

Unlike the JFK assassination and 9-11, no commission has yet been formed to investigate 7-7. As predicted by makers of the extraordinary documentary Ludicrous Diversion, such an official body would, in all likelihood, merely validate the official story. As with the Hutton Inquiry on the “suicide” of Dr. David Kelly19, its task would be to conceal the truth rather than reveal the facts. Philip Zelikow, now an advisor to Condoleezza Rice and former executive head of the 9-11 Commission, mentioned that the 9-11 Report did not make the same mistake as the Warren Report. While the latter contained 26 volumes of documentary evidence that proved very useful to assassination researchers, the 9-11 Commission Report includes no primary evidence at all. Interestingly, Zelikow is also in charge of the White House tapes recorded during JFK’s thousand days in power.20

The Anglo-American Heritage of Evil

No crime attributed to Islamic fundamentalism bears remote comparison with Nazi destruction of the European Jews, or Hitler’s grotesque reign of terror against German political resistors, Poles, Slavs, Gypsies, homosexuals, the disabled, and mentally challenged. Equally, the melancholy Allied wartime experience—my subject in the following paragraphs—looms over anything supposedly perpetrated by Islamofascism. Anglo-American revocation of human values discloses a vein of calculated cruelty recalling the worst excesses of the Roman Empire—though on a colossal scale undreamt of by the ancients.21

Scientific eugenics likely played a role in plans by President Roosevelt and Secretary of the Treasury Henry Morgenthau to castrate every German male following Hitler’s defeat.22 They decided against genital mutilation, but hardly for reasons of compassion. A relentless five-year campaign of aerial massacre had borne Germany to the abyss; a disembowled Reich would never again challenge the new Imperium.

Philosopher A.C. Grayling compares the murderous Allied feint that leveled Hamburg in 1943 with September 1123. Yet most of New York’s social life went on as usual when the Twin Towers collapsed into dust.24 The story was different for Hamburg.

RAF bombers deliberately bypassed Hamburg one sweltering July night in 1943, but veered suddenly toward the city as civil defense units relaxed. Bomber Command had known for some time that cities are easier to burn down than blow up. Before the raid, fire engineers ordered fire insurance maps precisely detailing the layout of Hamburg residences; they noted flammability of various items in typical Hamburg homes, no doubt including baby clothes and wooden cribs. “Operation Gomorrah,” writes Jorg Friedrich in the German best-seller, The Fire,

[m]elted between forty thousand and fifty thousand people. Seventy percent of them were in the Hamburg-Mitte district, where the weapon achieved a kill rate of 5.9 percent. In the strictly residential streets of Hammerbrook, 36 percent of the residents were killed. Seven thousand children and adolescents lost their lives, and ten thousand were orphaned . . . The munitions had been unloaded in 43 minutes, and they were followed by atmospheric reactions that raged for three hours with the force of a Pacific hurricane. And then there was nothing left to burn. Unable to protect itself, the city consumed itself. Nine hundred thousand people fled the smoldering skeletons of buildings, in which the plague of rats was the only thing left alive.25

Hamburg suffered a total of five major raids in late July and early August 1943. The second (described above) was the most devastating. Munitions dropped in the raids were designed to kill and seriously injure civilians; incendiary bombs included phosphorus that stuck to the skin, could not be doused with water, and burned to the bone. Time-delayed munitions disrupted rescue and fire-fighting efforts, ensuring maximum casualties.

The victims of the first attack [on Hamburg] were either blown up, suffocated in air raid shelters from which the air had been sucked away, or cremated instantly in the raging fires outside. Many bodies were found so shriveled by the heat that adult corpses had shrunk to the size of infants.26

The Hamburg raids “marked a beginning; the real beginning of the kind of bombing campaign that the British government and its Air Force commanders in the bomber force had been planning since early in the war.” Hamburg itself experienced 213 air raids; nothing was left but rubble by V-E day.

The 40,000 deaths from the July 1943 Hamburg raids, in addition to those of Dresden, Tokyo, Hiroshima and Nagasaki, are codes for the extremes of what can be inflicted by force of arms. Not because of the rivers of shed blood, but due to the quick, deadly breath with which life was taken from the world.27

Hamburg was one of six German cities that suffered “five digit casualty figures within a single raid . . . Kassel, Darmstadt, Pforzheim, Dresden, and Sweinmunde.”28 These deaths accounted for less than a third of total civilian bombing casualties. The RAF targeted more than a thousand German towns and cities; hundreds of thousands of civilians were massacred. Victory over Nazi Germany was clearly inevitable by early 1943, but the remorseless Anglo-American bombing campaign gathered momentum until the closing weeks of the war. By May 1945 “40 percent of the seventy largest cities had been demolished, mainly by bombing.” A.C. Grayling remarks that Anglo-American destruction of Germany and Japan amounts to culturecide, the “concerted smashing” of a people, its cultural heritage and collective memory.

Destroying cities meant—in addition to killing and traumatizing many thousands of people—destroying monuments, libraries, schools and universities, art galleries, architectural heritage, the cultural precipate and the organs of corporate life that make an identifiable society.29

Lessons for the July 7th Truth Campaign

Facile comparisons of July 7th with Hitler’s air raids on England point to a more disturbing reality: the Anglo-American capacity for boundless evil in pursuit of empire. Demonization of the British Muslim community encouraged by the official story of July 7th has its analogue in wartime hatred of Germans and Japanese that countenanced erasure of whole peoples. The British public dimly understood the horrific import of so-called area bombing, and many applauded destruction of an entire culture. Yet this was not universally true. Vera Brittain’s courageous pacifism reminds us—as does the July 7th Truth Campaign itself—that evil, provided the facts are known, can be confronted and resisted. Commenting in 1944 on British press reports that the people of Coventry were gratified by Germany’s pulverization, she wrote:

Do the inhabitants of Coventry really enjoy the thought that the citizens of Hamburg—the most anti-Nazi city in the Reich, with its once large Jewish population—have suffered 60 times as much as they did? Does it really fill them with glee to reflect that sixty times their number of children, expectant mothers, women in childbirth, invalids, and aged people have perished in terror and anguish? . . . . What I do believe . . . is that they either do not know the facts, or, where they suspect the truth, they have consciously put shutters over the windows of their imagination. Many deliberately turn their backs upon knowledge, ashamed and fearful of accepting the realities which a determined facing of the facts would disclose.30

Notes

David MacGregor [macgregor12b@mac.com] (PhD London School of Economics, 1978) is the author of a number of books and articles on Hegel and Marx. He has also written two articles concerning the September 11 terrorist attacks. He lives in Toronto. [return]

[British] Bomber Command and two US air forces had ravaged Germany as no civilization had ever before ….” Jorg Friedrich, The Fire: The Bombing of Germany, 1940-1945, New York: Columbia University Press, 2006, p. 101. [return]

London bombings: the unasked and unanswered questions

An article by Fazal Rahman, Ph.D. - written August 8, 2005

Muslim resistance to US-UK imperialism gains nothing from the truly terrorist acts, like those of the London bombings. US imperialism is the main beneficiary of such acts. It is highly improbable that the leaders of Muslim resistance do not understand this or that they would carry out such actions for the benefit of their mortal enemy. Who actually carried out the London bombings?

London Bombings: Unasked and Unanswered Questions

British authorities have laid the blame for the recent London bombings on some dead Muslim “suicide bombers”, who died, along with numerous other victims. Hundreds of people were also injured. Overwhelming majority of the dead and injured, as well as other passengers, on the trains and the bus, were not Muslims and were White British and other Westerners. And yet, the British authorities singled out a few Muslim passengers, who died in the bombings, as suspects, claiming that they were doing so on the basis of “forensic evidence”.

Nothing is easier than to blame such a crime on someone, who is dead and cannot defend himself, especially in the current hysteria of “War on Terrorism” in the West. There can be no conclusive and definitive “forensic evidence” in crimes of this nature. Whatever forensic evidence was found or concocted could have also been equally associated with numerous other victims as well as non-injured passengers.

Why would anyone blow himself/herself up during an attack like the London bombings, when it can be done rather easily by leaving the explosives on the trains and the bus, and disembarking without endangering oneself? The so-called “suicide bombers” in Palestine, Israel, and Iraq carry out such acts because they have very few, if any, other options in those situations. If they could carry out such actions without endangering or killing themselves, they would certainly choose that option.

The situation was totally different in London. The attackers had many options available to them. From the perspectives of the perpetrators, “suicide bombing” would be the most irrational, unnecessarily self-destructive, unlikely, and worst option in that situation, the ultimate psychopathic and self-destructive masochism. The best, most rational, and most likely option would have been, and most probably was, to leave the explosives on the targets, disembark, and then wait for the news of the results from a very safe distance. Logically, that is the most plausible and likely scenario. Most people who plan and carry out such acts are not stupid. They make careful and logical decisions and choose, what, they think, is the most practical and best option, from a variety of options, available to them in the particular situations.

Why was the above scenario not considered or considered seriously? Was it considered at all? If so, why has there been no public information or discussion of it?

The West has become totally decadent, unethical, and demonic, in subservience to the US imperialism. Almost every word the Western leaders, and especially those of the US, utter, in connection with the “war” on Iraq or “War on Terrorism”, is a most criminal, diabolical, and mass destructive lie. They are calling the invasion as “liberation”, occupation and colonialism as “democracy”, plunder and robbery as “generosity” and “reconstruction”, resistance to invasion, occupation, colonialism, plunder, and robbery as “insurgency”, and the March of Imperialism and Fascism as the “March of Freedom and Democracy” - and getting away with it! The victims of this most powerful and monstrous imperialist aggression are trying to resist it, the best they can, in face of incredible and seemingly impossible odds. However, Muslim resistance has nothing to gain, and a lot to lose, by bombings in London, Madrid, or elsewhere in Europe. Muslim resistance knows it and so do the imperialists.

Imperialists are the ones who reap enormous gains and benefits from such incidents, which are especially valuable at the current stage of developments, in which, the public support for the “War” on Iraq and “War on Terrorism” is rapidly declining, even in the US.

Is the Muslim resistance so ignorant, irrational, stupid, and masochistic that it would plan and implement such acts for the benefit of its mortal enemy, the US and British imperialism? Highly unlikely, almost impossible. If anyone is irrational, ignorant, and disinformed, it is the hundreds of millions of Westerners, who seem to be unable to see through the self-evident and mentally retarded lies of their leaders, in connection with the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan. Every Muslim child sees right through them and knows that these invasions are imperialist, centered around the robbery and plunder of the fabulous petroleum, natural gas, and other resources in these areas. There is no way that the leaders of Muslim resistance do not understand or know the effects of such actions and incidents. To portray them otherwise is pure racist and chauvinistic delusionism. And yet, such tactics are standard throughout the Western establishments, especially the official ones, under the influence of which, very large parts of their populations remain in perpetual state of false consciousness, in international and political affairs, bordering on delusions. The fact that one is hardly seeing any questioning of the official British version of the nature of London bombings, is a result of such mas produced “consciousness”, which defies all logic, facts, and evidence, and internalizes and reproduces the official garbage, thrown into it, with a mechanicalness comparable to the hard drive or compact disc of the computer.

In the case of London bombings, in the absence of any real evidence about the perpetrators, first and foremost, it is essential to ask who gains from such acts and who loses, as well as who has the resources, know-how, and operational abilities to carry them out. If those questions are asked, the compass needle moves to the imperialist aggressor and not its victims. Blaming the victims and exclusively focusing the investigation in that direction will not only implicate and victimize innocent people but will also further encourage the real perpetrators and planners to unleash more of such actions.

London bombings are likely to have been carried out by one or two well trained professionals, who carried the bomb-containing packages to the trains and the bus, left them there, and walked away, laughing all the way to the bank. The second London bombing, with minimal damages, may have been staged to further implicate the “Muslim extremists”, making, using, and planting primitive and inefficient explosive devices.

As described above, there are two major reasons for the implausibility and improbability of the involvement of Muslim resistance and “suicide bombers” in the London bombings.

In the London situation, there was no need for a suicide bombing. It could have been, and most probably was, carried out, relatively easily, without endangering oneself.

Muslim resistance has nothing to gain, and a lot to lose, by engaging in such acts in Europe, while the US imperialists are the main beneficiaries of such actions.

The above scenario, in spite of being hypothetical, is much more rational, plausible, and likely than what has been spun out so far by the British government. It is certainly worth looking into if the purpose of investigation is to uncover and find the real perpetrators of the London bombings, instead of finding the easiest way out by blaming some dead men as “suicide bombers”.

The real nature of the London bombings is likely to be incomparably more sinister than what is being manufactured by the British authorities. Whatever evidence is being produced could have easily been planted by the resourceful planners and perpetrators. It seems to have been the work of a highly professional and resourceful organization. US imperialists are becoming extremely unscrupulous and intoxicated in their international operations. Recently, the CIA has been caught red-handed in Italy in connection with the kidnapping and transport of a Muslim cleric to Egypt where he was subjected to prearranged jailing and torture. An Italian judge has issued arrest warrants for nineteen CIA agents, who are no longer in Italy, for that crime. There was also an uproar in the British academic circles when it was discovered that the CIA was recruiting British anthropologists. There is no lower limit for the infinitely low-lives, who can plan and implement such a grand mass murderous robbery as the one taking place in Iraq, in broad daylight, under pretexts that would put any mental retard to shame. Destruction of human lives not only means nothing to them, they feed and grow on it.

On the hypothesis of the article on London bombings

An article by Fazal Rahman, Ph.D. - October 31, 2006

A first draft of Fazal Rahman's follow up to his August 2005 article, "London bombings: the unasked and unanswered questions" which explores hypotheses other than the evidence-free conspiracy theory touted by the British government in the Home Office narrative and disseminated by a compliant, complicit and unquestioning British media.

Nine comments have been posted, so far, on the article on the above Indymedia web sites. Some are very nasty, mindless, and vulgar, with the intent to provoke, smear, and disinform; a couple are supportive of the basic premises of the article’s hypothesis; while others reproduce the government information and conclusions, totally uncritically and unquestioningly, expressing annoyance that someone is raising some questions about those Absolute Truths!

On October 30, I found that the article had been abruptly removed from the front page of Oxford Indymedia! That is unusual as the articles there, as well as on the other web sites, normally run their course, descending gradually under the newly published articles. On October 31, I could not find the article on the Oxford Indymedia site at all in the archives. It seems that they have completely removed it! They only allowed it to stay on their site for a couple of days. We may never know why it was done or under whose pressure. One of the basic purposes of such web sites is to promote debate through diversity of comments and opinions. During the short time this article was allowed to stay on the front page of Oxford Indymedia, more comments were sent about it than any other article on the front page during that time. And yet, they selectively and deliberately removed it from the front page and, one day later, from the archives altogether!

I have now visited the www.julyseventh.co.uk web site and found excellent research data, information, and analysis of all the matters connected with the London bombings. Among other things, they have presented official and Alternative Hypotheses and correlated all the known facts with these. Their impeccable scientific approach to this whole matter is self-evident.

Whatever the nasty and vulgar as well as other critics have reproduced, in their comments, from the government sources, has already been logically, factually, and scientifically addressed and analyzed on the www.julyseventh.co.uk . I cannot do a better job of that and, therefore, would like to refer all the conformists and firm believers in the government information (disinformation) to that site. There, they will find a lot more than the logical and factual refutation of their “facts” and “arguments”. In this brief article, my focus is on the nature of the hypothesis I presented in the above article and its similarities and affinity with some of the independently arrived hypotheses of the July 7th group.

My focus in the article-written a month after the bombings - when almost all the details and specifics were being kept in the dark, and selective contradictory information was being released - was on outlining a brief logical and historical hypothesis. As is stated clearly in the article, it is a hypothetical analysis, with the following four specific and concrete logical, factual, historical, and philosophical premises, some explicit, others implicit, in it:

1. In the London situation, there was no need for a suicide bombing. It could have been, and most probably was, carried out, relatively easily, without endangering oneself.

2. Muslim resistance has nothing to gain, and a lot to lose, by engaging in such acts in Europe.

3. US and UK imperialists are the main beneficiaries of such terrorist actions in Europe.

4. Both the imperialists and the leaders of Muslim resistance understand and know these political, military, and logical facts and their policies and actions include these.

These are the essential premises of the hypothesis involved in the above article. I contend that these are apodictic and irrefutable. I invite the conformists and firm believers in the mainstream hypothesis to try to refute these and make my day. They can probably attempt to do so with part of the 4th premise and, attributing irrationality, incompetence, and ignorance to the leaders of Muslim resistance, may argue that they do not understand and implement these in their policies or actions. But that would only prove their own ignorance, arrogance, irrationality, and incompetence, rooted in racism and national chauvinism. During the early years of Vietnam War, the West was full of such idiots, who, projecting their own ignorance, irrationality, and incompetence to the Vietnamese, were loudly broadcasting and claiming that no Asian nation could stand up to and resist the superpower of US. As it turned out, the Vietnamese were far superior in strategy, tactics, planning, and their implementation, as well as in fighting, than the technocratic elites of the superpower. However, obviously, the imperialists have become intoxicated again and forgotten the lessons of Vietnam. They are relearning them the hard way, with great loss of life and other damages.

As pointed out by the July 7th group, the government’s position, in regard to the London bombings, constitutes only one of many Alternative Hypotheses. It does not constitute the Absolute Truth, which the conformists and firm believers are making it out to be. Logically and philosophically, that insight is of fundamental importance in this whole matter. If one remains ignorant of that, one remains trapped in the disinformation.

What the July 7th group seems to be demanding is that all the facts be investigated, revealed, and utilized in the construction or validation of Alternative Hypotheses, and not just some of them, self-servingly selected, to fit into the implicit or explicit hypotheses of the officialdom. That is precisely what the British government and mainstream media have done. The July 7th group has made a concrete factual and logical analysis of this matter and more details can be found on their web site. The key point here is that facts are facts only when they are integrated and related to each other in their common logical structure (paraphrasing Hegel here). Only in that form, they fit into and are consistent with an appropriate hypothesis or theory. “Facts” that are fragmented, abstracted, and isolated from each other and their common logical structure, can be implanted into a variety of false and erroneous hypotheses.

In the London bombings, there were three train explosions and one on a bus. There was contradictory information about the timings of these explosions and the nature of the explosives used. The authorities were, somehow, quickly able to associate these bombings with four dead Asian Muslims and determine their identities, while overwhelming majority of the rest remained unidentified at that time. From there, they started fitting these facts into the prefabricated hypothesis of Muslim terrorism being responsible for what had happened. Alternative Hypotheses of the involvement of imperialists, their secret services, organized crime etc., along with the four dead men, were totally ignored and remained uninvestigated. For example, everyone knows that the CIA is one of the major instruments of US imperialism and it has a long history of subversion, sabotage, terrorism, overthrow of governments, assassination or attempted assassination of the popular and democratic leaders of other countries, and the use of organized crime in some of these actions, e.g., having obtained the services of Mafia for the assassination of President Fidel Castro of Cuba during the early 1960s. All that is well documented. It even caused some conscientious ex-CIA agents to leave the agency and expose its real nature, plots, and crimes. Philip Agee has been the most conscientious, courageous, knowledgeable, and internationalist of those ex-CIA agents, who has shed very important light on such operations of CIA, in his various writings, lectures, and solidarity work. If the CIA could do that in so many other countries, why it would not do the same in UK or other European countries, when needed? Of course, it would be totally hopeless and unrealistic to expect the British government and secret services to investigate such connections. To the contrary, they should be expected to do the opposite, i-e. to leave such a possible connection totally untouched and to cover it up if any facts or evidence emerge. Hence, the importance of great public service by groups like July 7th, which are keeping the flame burning. Just imagine, what will happen to the known facts, and the mainstream hypotheses-listed on July 7th site- of which they have been made part of, if some evidence emerges of the involvement of organized crime or some CIA front group with the four dead Asian Muslims, in the London bombings? In such a situation, the context of these facts will totally change and so will the meanings and nature of these facts. Right now, these are part of an illogical structure, as part of the mainstream hypotheses, the basic premises of which are, as indicated above, in diametric contradiction with the required logical-factual-philosophical-historical premises of this matter, explicitly or implicitly inherent in the hypothesis of the above article or some of the Alternative Hypotheses proposed by the July 7th group.

The July 7th group has also documented the profiles of the four dead Asian Muslims, accused of having committed that crime, as well as of their families. If these profiles are even halfway accurate, it is hard to imagine how such human beings could carry out such violence against themselves and so many others.

The following three Alternative Hypotheses have been listed, among others, on the web site of the July 7th group and their numbers below are also those that are given there:

6. The four men thought they were going to be delivering drugs or money to various locations round London, but were deceived, set up and murdered along with the others on their tubes and bus when their back packs exploded.

7. As above but the men thought they were carrying dummy 'bombs' because they were participating in an exercise testing London transport's defences against backpack bombers.

8. The four men were chosen or lured in to be patsies in a classic 'false flag operation' or frame-up by a network involved with one or more of the intelligence services.

These hypotheses are more of a factual nature in contrast with the hypothesis of above article, the premises of which are more of logical, historical, and philosophical nature. Some of the hypotheses of the July 7th group and that of the article complement each other and make each other more wholesome and holistic. For example, if viewed from the perspectives of aforementioned four premises of the hypothesis of the article, these three hypotheses from the July 7th group are consistent with those premises, while the other five-not listed here, which are various concoctions of the mainstream and the officialdom-are not. There is a natural and organic compatibility and fit between the general hypothesis of the article and the above three specific hypotheses of the July 7th group.

Within the framework of the above-mentioned four premises of hypothesis of the article, with some modifications and combination of the three hypotheses of the July 7th group, a new hypothesis, Hypothesis #9 can be constructed:

Hypothesis #9: In this hypothesis, #6 and #8 or #7 and #8 are proposed to be combined. #6 and #7 would remain essentially the same while #8 would involve a secret service, coordinating and guiding a front organization and an organized crime group. Here four possibilities are proposed:

1. As exactly in #6, The four men thought they were going to be delivering drugs, money, confidential documents, or other material etc. to various locations round London, but were deceived, set up and murdered along with the others on their tubes and bus when their back packs exploded.

2. As above but the men thought they were carrying dummy 'bombs' because they were participating in an exercise testing London transport's defences against backpack bombers.

3. As in the July 7th group Hypothesis #8, proposed by Fintan Dunne, the four men were murdered before any explosions took place and then their body parts were planted on the sites of the explosions. In this scenario, the involvement of an organized crime group or some secret service front organization is more likely than that of the police, as proposed by Fintan Dunne.

4. There was a fifth man who followed the four men to one of the trains. This man was carrying the explosives. He left them near the four men and then got off the train. He noted down the car number and its location, etc., so that his contacts in the secret service knew exactly where to find the body parts of the four men, who then, through some key contact in the police, managed to link each of the four to the different sites of the explosions.

Third and fourth possibilities require the involvement and cooperation of some key police officials. The first and second possibilities do not need the involvement of any police official or organized crime. These would have required just one secret service or its front organization contact person with the four men. These seem to be the most likely possibilities.

Some of the above possibilities would have been relatively easy to arrange and implement for some resourceful, experienced, and powerful organization, with long global reach and presence. It would not even be too difficult to arrange something like that even for an individual, with some means at his disposal. For example, if Timothy McVeigh, the Oklahoma city Federal Building bomber, had thought about it and wanted to, he could have lured and trapped some Muslim men into his plot by arranging to meet with them near his explosives-filled vehicle. Just before the explosions were set to occur, he could have excused himself for having to go to the bathroom or something like that, leaving the men near his vehicle. After the explosion and devastation, their body parts would have been found and they would have been identified. If that had happened, all the other facts would have been concocted and tailored to fit into the hypothesis of Muslim terrorism being responsible for that act and McVeigh would have been walking free, planning his next move. The official investigation would have ended right then and there at that point. It is almost certain that no other Alternative Hypotheses would have been considered in such a situation. Even at that time, there was hysteria about Muslim terrorism and in the aftermath of the explosion, in the absence of any evidence, Muslims were being blamed for that act of terrorism. It was only after the unexpected arrest of McVeigh that Muslims were exonerated from the responsibility for that terrorist act.

Regardless of the practical results, it is most important to continue to struggle for truth and justice against all odds. At this diabolical stage of history, the power of truth, justice, spirit, intellect, and authentic human nature is diametrically opposed and overwhelmed by the power of capital, in the form of imperialist corporations, governments and their agencies in various advanced capitalist countries. Under such conditions, the inner ecology of human nature itself has been powerfully and drastically disrupted, to variable degrees and forms. More than any other time in human history, it is essential to preserve and express one’s authentic human nature, to the best of one’s ability. Speaking and uncovering the truth is a most important part of that process and that is what is also involved the matter of London bombings. So many people lost their lives in that tragedy. Lies, concoctions, fragmented and abstract “facts” and tailoring them to fit into illogical structures of incompatible hypotheses, refusal to consider Alternative Hypotheses or to discover other facts that these point towards etc. desecrate and disgrace the dead victims. Only a thorough and in-depth investigation, oriented towards uncovering all the facts and their logical analysis, with the objective of discovery of truth on that basis, will honor and do justice to those victims. Poisonous and mindless “patriotic”, national chauvinistic, and racist prejudices not only damage the Muslims and other minorities, they also damage and desecrate all the victims of that tragedy, regardless of race or religion, as well as obstruct justice and truth.

The above is first draft of this article.... I will receive any constructive criticism and suggestions for improvement or modifications of this article or its hypothesis with gratitude.

Subscribe To

Followers

Fair Use Notice

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We make such material available in an effort to advance awareness and understanding of issues relating to civil rights, religious tolerance, economics, individual rights, international affairs, liberty, science & technology, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.